SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: kash johal who wrote (45122)1/7/1999 6:16:00 PM
From: Yousef  Read Replies (1) of 1572012
 
Kash,

Re: "The 100nm gates look tighter than what Intel was talking about at IEDM
presentation."

Kash, Before you go "jumping for joy", you might want to investigate the
Gate length numbers. I believe these could well be Leff (Effective gate
lengths extracted from electrical data) numbers. Depending on the FET
architecture (Implants, thermal cycles ...) you need to add 50 - 80nm to
AMD's numbers to get to the Lgate (Physical gate length) quoted by Intel.
For example, Intel's .25um process has an Lgate of ~200nm with an Leff
of ~140nm. The reason I question AMD's Gate lengths is because putting
2.2V across an FET with an Lgate of 170nm would give reliability problems.
Also Kash, this explanation of AMD's Gate lengths would also explain why
their CPU's don't run as fast as Intel's (Pay attention Ali).

Make It So,
Yousef
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News